The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1887-12-31
The Wool Industry and the Tarin.


we believe to be the true situation
on the, at this time, absorbing topic
of wool and wool production, than
is done In the following extract
from an interview with Mr.. Charles
Beach, as published recently in the
New York Times.
/ The woolen manufacturing in
dustry Of Connecticut Beach 4 Co.
are heavily interested. They own
the Broad Brook Woolen Mills and
have large interests in three other
concerns. Charles Beach, the head
Of the firm, is widely known thro'-
out New England, and Is consid-,
cred a level-headed man of busi-
ness. The Arm, by the way, is also
a very heavy importer of analine
dyes. On the wool question he says:
"The Presidents Message promised
just the relief needed. Without
such relief the future of the woolen
manufacturing industry was not of
a character to afford much comfort
to those who had money invested
in it.
The United States, Mr.. Beach
said, was the largest consumer in
the world of fine woolen goods, and
last year imported woolen fabrics
of the value of $4O,OOO,OOO. If wool
had been on the free list for the last
few years a large proportion Of
these goods would have been man.
ufactured in this country. 1t had
been estimated, and by careful
men, that the United States would
import 15O,OOO,OoO pounds Of fine
merino wool, or its equivalent in
fine manufactured woolen goods, to
supply the domestic trade. Taking
the average fine wool sales in the
London market as basis, the duty
the American manufacturer is
compelled to pay is over 100 per
cent, and he can only afford to buy
when foreign prices are very much
depressed. The duty on wool for
the year ended June 80, 1886, was
$751; per cent; in 1887 twas 55.2 per
cent, as high on an average as 1t
had been on the entire importation
for the four years proceeding the
reduction of 1883. The duty then
taken off, the wool-growers now
wanted restored. They attribute
the depressed price of their wool to
that reduction. This conclusion,
Mr.. Beach said, was altogether err
roneous. Wool was low in foreign
markets, and kept at such a de-
pressed price by the American
tariff that foreign manufacturers
were enabled to make woolen
goods so cheap as to overcome the
American duty. In proof of this
he referred to the importation last
year of $40, ,OOo, 900 of manufactured
wooden goods.
The duty on fine woolen goods
fine ready made clothing, for in
stance-was less than on the wool
of which the goods were manu-
factured. Many fine woolen goods
were imported under duty of is
per cent. The finer the grade of
goods the lower was the duty after
the 80 cents per pound mark was
reached. This discrimination gives
the poor man an opportunity of
buying shoddy; the high tariff al
most made it compulsory that he
should do so. Would tho admis-
sion of free wool have tendency
to reduce wages? Mr.. Beach
promptly replied in the the mega
tive. Labor here is higher than in
the old country. Free acool aDould
increase the demand for labor be-
cause it stimulates manufacturing
to an enormous extent. 1t would
give to America the markets now
possessed to u large extent by
foreign manufacturers. If the ad-
mission of wool free of duty made
any change in the rate Of wages it
would be in an upward direction.
American manufacturers were
willing to pay higher wages
than their foreign competitors
paid, for Americans did not want
cheap labor; but it must be evident
that the American manufacturer
could not pay higher price for his
labor and also a higher price for
his material than his foreign COM
petitor paid for either without
making goods that cost more than
those of foreign manufacture.
Would not the free admission Of
foreign wool lower the price of
American wool? That did not
necessarily follow, Mr.. Beach main
tanned. America is SO large a buy
er of American woods that the
moment the tariff Is removed the
price Of foreign material would